blogs
Other articles and blogs are included on my LinkedIn page here.
Spheres of Influence
Working in the field of diversity and inclusion, I am often asked what can be done to increase the number of under-represented people in engineering. One of the things I find helpful when having this conversation is related to the Spheres of Influence theory, that urges us to act in areas that we can directly control, or that we can influence, and not to waste time and energy on things that we cannot control or influence. So if you imagine that you are a the centre of a sphere, then immediately adjacent to you in your sphere is the world about you that you are in control of. This is where you can make direct changes without reference to anybody or anything else. This is where your own values, beliefs and motivations determine your behaviour.
Further out from this first zone is the zone in which you have an influence. This is where you can exert your soft power, your influence or your means of persuasion to get other people to behave in ways which further your beliefs or goals. This may be influence that you can exert on your family members, your friends, or your colleagues, and depending on your professional role and your seniority, this could give you a significant reach.
Further out again is the zone which you cannot necessarily influence in your current role, but if you could, then this is what you would like to see happen. So here for example might be the action you would like those in positions of power to take, or even the action you would like the Government to take. Whilst you do not necessarily have control or influence over this zone, it is useful to imagine what you would like to happen here - you never know when you might be sitting next to your CEO or a Government minister at a dinner, or on the train, and having these actions in mind will help you exert your influence! Further out again is the zone which is very difficult to change. Here, for example, you can put the national culture that has dominated the UK for decades, or widely held societal beliefs and norms that would be very difficult - although not impossible – to change. Change in this zone requires serious commitment and momentum on a national or even global level. Campaigns like Black Lives Matter, or the #MeToo movement have recently changed behaviour at this global level.
Depending on your own level of seniority, your sphere of influence diagram will look very different. If you are in middle or senior management then there will be things that are in your control that are not in the control of somebody more junior. If you are the Prime Minister then your sphere of influence would look very different to somebody who has just graduated. The important thing is to set out the actions that are relevant to your own position.
Segmenting the sphere into sectors radiating from the centre (like pizza slices), with a particular final destination change as the ultimate goal, will allow you to segmentalize actions which can lead to a specified outcome. For example, my own work ultimately aims to create a more diverse and inclusive engineering sector, in which case each of the individual pizza slices would contribute to that as the ultimate outcome. These pizza slices might be entitled, for example; Promote Inclusive Promotion and Recruitment; Diversify Award Winners; Use Employee Networks to Support Culture Change; Support STEM Outreach, Set Targets and Measures; Collaborate for Success, etc
Taking one of these headings, one might envisage that the series of actions that radiate from the centre might be as follows:
Ultimate Aim: Promote Inclusive Recruitment
The sphere of influence model is a useful tool in many areas of work, as it allows you to envisage what actions can be taken towards an ultimate goal, and envisaging a series of small steps is usually more enabling than imaging an enormous leap from the current situation to the final destination. In terms of climate change, for example, it can be more empowering to ask yourself what actions are possible for you as an individual, than to think about how the UK will ultimately achieve its zero net carbon ambition.
Whatever you are trying to influence, best of luck with your planning.
Further out from this first zone is the zone in which you have an influence. This is where you can exert your soft power, your influence or your means of persuasion to get other people to behave in ways which further your beliefs or goals. This may be influence that you can exert on your family members, your friends, or your colleagues, and depending on your professional role and your seniority, this could give you a significant reach.
Further out again is the zone which you cannot necessarily influence in your current role, but if you could, then this is what you would like to see happen. So here for example might be the action you would like those in positions of power to take, or even the action you would like the Government to take. Whilst you do not necessarily have control or influence over this zone, it is useful to imagine what you would like to happen here - you never know when you might be sitting next to your CEO or a Government minister at a dinner, or on the train, and having these actions in mind will help you exert your influence! Further out again is the zone which is very difficult to change. Here, for example, you can put the national culture that has dominated the UK for decades, or widely held societal beliefs and norms that would be very difficult - although not impossible – to change. Change in this zone requires serious commitment and momentum on a national or even global level. Campaigns like Black Lives Matter, or the #MeToo movement have recently changed behaviour at this global level.
Depending on your own level of seniority, your sphere of influence diagram will look very different. If you are in middle or senior management then there will be things that are in your control that are not in the control of somebody more junior. If you are the Prime Minister then your sphere of influence would look very different to somebody who has just graduated. The important thing is to set out the actions that are relevant to your own position.
Segmenting the sphere into sectors radiating from the centre (like pizza slices), with a particular final destination change as the ultimate goal, will allow you to segmentalize actions which can lead to a specified outcome. For example, my own work ultimately aims to create a more diverse and inclusive engineering sector, in which case each of the individual pizza slices would contribute to that as the ultimate outcome. These pizza slices might be entitled, for example; Promote Inclusive Promotion and Recruitment; Diversify Award Winners; Use Employee Networks to Support Culture Change; Support STEM Outreach, Set Targets and Measures; Collaborate for Success, etc
Taking one of these headings, one might envisage that the series of actions that radiate from the centre might be as follows:
Ultimate Aim: Promote Inclusive Recruitment
- Within my control as a junior member of staff: use the principle of 'personal invitation' to suggest and signpost colleagues to apply for jobs/promotions. Apply for promotion, or express interest in promotional opportunities even if currently beyond my reach. Point out non-inclusive job adverts to people placing jobs.
- Within my control as a middle manager: Ensure all job adverts and descriptions are inclusive; sponsor or mentor a junior member of staff; always insist on using ‘inclusion rider’ in job advertising.
- Within my control as a senior manager: Set targets for recruitment and promotion; employ 'positive action' and inclusive recruitment principles to ensure that new vacancies are filled in ways which increase diversity; sign up to recognised best practice organisations promoting inclusive recruitment; enter a reverse mentoring partnership; make the diversity of the organisation a company priority.
- Within my control at nationally influential level: Set incentives which lead to companies recruiting a diverse workforce (e.g. through procurement levers); embed diversity and inclusion as part of a balanced scorecard when awarding contracts
The sphere of influence model is a useful tool in many areas of work, as it allows you to envisage what actions can be taken towards an ultimate goal, and envisaging a series of small steps is usually more enabling than imaging an enormous leap from the current situation to the final destination. In terms of climate change, for example, it can be more empowering to ask yourself what actions are possible for you as an individual, than to think about how the UK will ultimately achieve its zero net carbon ambition.
Whatever you are trying to influence, best of luck with your planning.
World Engineering Day for Sustainable Development March 2021
World Engineering Day for Sustainable Development takes place annually on 4th March, and in 2021 the day is being marked by the publication of an Engineering for Sustainable Development Report, only the second ever engineering report commissioned by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation. As part of this report, I look at the need to develop a diverse and inclusive engineering sector, and the need to work towards a culture where all engineering professionals can thrive and succeed to leadership positions. In order to ensure, however, that engineering reeps the benefit of these diverse skills and viewpoints, so that we are able to produce solutions which are truly sustainable, accessible to all, and leave no-one behind, we must allow people to be not only comfortable – but encouraged – to bring their own identities with them to work. We hear very often from women working as engineering and technology professionals that they do not want to be seen as a woman, but they are only want to be seen as an engineer/technologist/scientist. We also hear of the concept of ‘code switching’ – where people change their identities at work to fit in, leaving their feminine (or other intersectional) identity at the gate, and picking it up again when they walk out, so that they fit in with the dominant culture of the workplace – usually male and homogenous. This behaviour is not only exhausting for the individual, but ineffective for the company, who are well aware of the benefits of a diverse workforce, and a need for diversity of thought on the products and services that they produce. And we also know from numerous reports that employees are much more productive when they feel included, more likely to remain in the company, and more likely to work towards the business goals. So an inclusive culture is good for business, and as individuals we need to ensure that this is translated to reality.
The importance of finding ways to get more women and other marginalised groups into engineering could not be more important for sustainable development. Women are disadvantaged globally on an enormous scale, where restrictions that impact their freedom, ability to own land, independence, lack of digital identity, limited access to information and jobs, all mean that they are disproportionately disadvantaged, and that the girl child is equally likely to suffer disadvantage too. The use of engineering and technology to address some of these disadvantages is key – for example, the growth of microfinance initiatives, which are accessible to women in ways that traditional loans are not, and allow them to grow their farming businesses through small repayable loans has transformed many lives. But giving access to engineering careers to women is even more transformational. Careers in engineering and technology are well paid and highly valued, but in addition to this, they literally allow women to have say in how the future world is built. And it is this level of influence that is crucial to creating a more accessible, equitable and sustainable world.
So if you are a woman in engineering, my message to you on World Engineering Day, and on International Women’s Day*, is to use your influence – and use your influence as a woman engineer to help other women globally, and to create a world which leaves no-one behind.
*The theme of International Women’s Day this year is Choose to Change.
The importance of finding ways to get more women and other marginalised groups into engineering could not be more important for sustainable development. Women are disadvantaged globally on an enormous scale, where restrictions that impact their freedom, ability to own land, independence, lack of digital identity, limited access to information and jobs, all mean that they are disproportionately disadvantaged, and that the girl child is equally likely to suffer disadvantage too. The use of engineering and technology to address some of these disadvantages is key – for example, the growth of microfinance initiatives, which are accessible to women in ways that traditional loans are not, and allow them to grow their farming businesses through small repayable loans has transformed many lives. But giving access to engineering careers to women is even more transformational. Careers in engineering and technology are well paid and highly valued, but in addition to this, they literally allow women to have say in how the future world is built. And it is this level of influence that is crucial to creating a more accessible, equitable and sustainable world.
So if you are a woman in engineering, my message to you on World Engineering Day, and on International Women’s Day*, is to use your influence – and use your influence as a woman engineer to help other women globally, and to create a world which leaves no-one behind.
*The theme of International Women’s Day this year is Choose to Change.
Ingenia Article – Engineering Skills for an Inclusive Future Feb 2021
Those working in engineering, and in engineering Higher Education in particular, will have been buoyed recently by the UCAS admissions and acceptance data, published in early February, which showed a significant increase in students applying for technology-based degrees over last decade, with growth in engineering subjects from 20,000 to 30,000, and from 26,000 to 31,500 in computer science courses since 2011.* Acceptances to artificial intelligence (AI) courses have increasing by 400%, although actual numbers still only stand at 355 in total in 2020. There is evidence too that the gender gap is closing, with the ratio of UK male to female acceptances in engineering falling from 8.2 in 2011 to 5.0 in 2020, although this is not reflected in computer science with the gap falling from 6.2 in 2011, to 5.7 in 2020.
In this positive context, the skills that engineers and technologists acquire to shape the future have never been more important. The Sustainable Development Goals are now well and truly established as key drivers for future development, and the race to achieve the ambitious Net Zero Carbon target that the UK government has imposed by 2050 is another great way of focusing minds and actions towards a desired outcome. In fact this outcomes driven narrative may well be what is required to attract even more people to engineering and technology careers, and a more diverse sector. Shifting the attention from ‘becoming an engineer’ – something that already is out of the question and has been long since ruled out for many members of the groups that are under-represented in engineering – to addressing climate change or global poverty, for example, is much more likely to have the desired result. Tackling issues such as the climate emergency, accessible healthcare and the environment are a big motivation for young people. So, it’s certainly to our advantage in terms of attracting new skills to present Engineering as a ‘caring’ or "social good" profession, one directly associated with solving problems and making people’s lives better.
And the outcomes-based argument is equally valid for encouraging our current engineers to understand the need for diversity in our profession too. Looking more closely at what we produce as engineers, and whether it is truly accessible and equitable for all people and all parts of our community, forces us to realise that we have not paid close enough attention to the needs of others when producing our engineering solutions in the past. This has been shown all too clearly with the effects of the Covid pandemic and the Grenfell fire, for example, where poorer communities have been made more vulnerable by inadequacies in our built environment. There are many other examples of how our engineering and technological solutions are building bias into our future solutions, and this has never been more important to address as we develop new disruptive digital systems based on the use of data, artificial intelligence and machine learning, where biases built in now will be present – and in many cases undetectable – for many years to come. These, however, are the more obvious examples which show the unintended consequences of some of our engineering solutions. In other examples, such as the apparently uncontroversial specification of a certain ducting material in a new building – a decision usually made without any knowledge or reference to how this material might negatively and disproportionately impact certain parts of our society who bear the brunt of toxic chemical production more than others – the impacts are harder to spot but nonetheless equally harmful.
Becoming more aware of how the outcomes of our engineering endeavours have social justice implications in the world is an awakening that many of us are just coming to terms with. Building a world that is fairer, more just, and will lead us to the solutions represented by the Sustainable Development Goals is something that we need a diverse engineering sector to take on board.
To support this and to make the most of young people’s motivation, we need curriculum change. We need courses that inspire thinking and creativity; translating ideas through engineering design to innovation that are of benefits to humankind and the planet.
21st century biggest challenges need engineering solutions that pay equal attention to economic, social and environmental impact and this needs to be reflected in the curriculum design of university engineering education.
*UCAS Website https://www.ucas.com/corporate/news-and-key-documents/news/students-turn-technology-university-choices
Dawn Bonfield MBE is the Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Chapter author of the UNESCO Engineering Report, published in March 2021. She is a Royal Academy of Engineering Visiting Professor at Aston University and a Royal Society Entrepreneur in Residence at King’s College London. She is a UK representative of the World Federation of Engineering Organisations, and Past President of the Women’s Engineering Society.
Professor Bashir Al-Hashimi CBE FREng is Executive Dean of the Faculty of Natural, Mathematical and Engineering Sciences at King’s College London. He has worked globally on research innovation into energy-efficient and reliable embedded systems and is the editor in chief the IET Journal: Computers and Digital Techniques.
In this positive context, the skills that engineers and technologists acquire to shape the future have never been more important. The Sustainable Development Goals are now well and truly established as key drivers for future development, and the race to achieve the ambitious Net Zero Carbon target that the UK government has imposed by 2050 is another great way of focusing minds and actions towards a desired outcome. In fact this outcomes driven narrative may well be what is required to attract even more people to engineering and technology careers, and a more diverse sector. Shifting the attention from ‘becoming an engineer’ – something that already is out of the question and has been long since ruled out for many members of the groups that are under-represented in engineering – to addressing climate change or global poverty, for example, is much more likely to have the desired result. Tackling issues such as the climate emergency, accessible healthcare and the environment are a big motivation for young people. So, it’s certainly to our advantage in terms of attracting new skills to present Engineering as a ‘caring’ or "social good" profession, one directly associated with solving problems and making people’s lives better.
And the outcomes-based argument is equally valid for encouraging our current engineers to understand the need for diversity in our profession too. Looking more closely at what we produce as engineers, and whether it is truly accessible and equitable for all people and all parts of our community, forces us to realise that we have not paid close enough attention to the needs of others when producing our engineering solutions in the past. This has been shown all too clearly with the effects of the Covid pandemic and the Grenfell fire, for example, where poorer communities have been made more vulnerable by inadequacies in our built environment. There are many other examples of how our engineering and technological solutions are building bias into our future solutions, and this has never been more important to address as we develop new disruptive digital systems based on the use of data, artificial intelligence and machine learning, where biases built in now will be present – and in many cases undetectable – for many years to come. These, however, are the more obvious examples which show the unintended consequences of some of our engineering solutions. In other examples, such as the apparently uncontroversial specification of a certain ducting material in a new building – a decision usually made without any knowledge or reference to how this material might negatively and disproportionately impact certain parts of our society who bear the brunt of toxic chemical production more than others – the impacts are harder to spot but nonetheless equally harmful.
Becoming more aware of how the outcomes of our engineering endeavours have social justice implications in the world is an awakening that many of us are just coming to terms with. Building a world that is fairer, more just, and will lead us to the solutions represented by the Sustainable Development Goals is something that we need a diverse engineering sector to take on board.
To support this and to make the most of young people’s motivation, we need curriculum change. We need courses that inspire thinking and creativity; translating ideas through engineering design to innovation that are of benefits to humankind and the planet.
21st century biggest challenges need engineering solutions that pay equal attention to economic, social and environmental impact and this needs to be reflected in the curriculum design of university engineering education.
*UCAS Website https://www.ucas.com/corporate/news-and-key-documents/news/students-turn-technology-university-choices
Dawn Bonfield MBE is the Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Chapter author of the UNESCO Engineering Report, published in March 2021. She is a Royal Academy of Engineering Visiting Professor at Aston University and a Royal Society Entrepreneur in Residence at King’s College London. She is a UK representative of the World Federation of Engineering Organisations, and Past President of the Women’s Engineering Society.
Professor Bashir Al-Hashimi CBE FREng is Executive Dean of the Faculty of Natural, Mathematical and Engineering Sciences at King’s College London. He has worked globally on research innovation into energy-efficient and reliable embedded systems and is the editor in chief the IET Journal: Computers and Digital Techniques.
World Federation of Engineering Organisations (WFEO)
In March this year I had the pleasure and the honour of attending the World Federation of Engineering Organisations (WFEO) 50th anniversary meeting at the UNESCO HQ in Paris.
WFEO is an international, non-governmental organization representing the engineering profession worldwide.
Founded in 1968 by a group of regional engineering organizations, under the auspices of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organizations (UNESCO) in Paris, the World Federation of Engineering Organizations (WFEO) brings together national engineering organisations from some 100 nations and represents more than 30 million engineers from around the world. The UK representative place is held by the Institution of Civil Engineers, and Haro Bedalian is the nominated representative, with other UK representation by Jean Venables as the Chair of the Engineering and Environment Standing Committee, and me as the UK representative on the Women in Engineering Committee. The UK has another high level representative in Past ICE President Paul Jowitt who represents the Commonwealth Engineers Council, who used the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) recently to work more closely together on built environment issues. See their recent progress here.
WFEO itself is led by Dr Marlene Kanga as its President, who has a phenomenal reputation for the work she has done worldwide to promote gender diversity in engineering.
The Women in Engineering Committee has representatives from 36 countries, and already my engagement with this engagement has resulted in closer working with the South African organisation WomEng, who are promoting the goal of #1MillionGirlsinSTEM, and have an inspiring pink hard hat campaign which we are hoping to replicate in the UK with a purple version to coincide with the Women’s Engineering Society (WES) centenary in 2019. This fun campaign works on the premise that 'it takes a stereotype to break a stereotype' in promoting the hard hat image to young women. And before you role your eyes, I can tell you that this is actually working. The excitement in the room when we saw 60 young women being given pink hard hats on International Women's Day back in March was phenomenal. We ALL wanted one - hardened mature professional women engineers just as much as 16 year olds. I will tell you more about this in another post.
The next meeting of the WFEO takes place during the Global Engineering Congress at ICE in October 2018, and this is an ideal opportunity for the UK to showcase its engineering excellence to the rest of the world. Further details here. Please put this in your diaries – it looks set to be an excellent event.
Please get in touch if you would like to know more about WFEO and the Women in Engineering Committee.
WFEO is an international, non-governmental organization representing the engineering profession worldwide.
Founded in 1968 by a group of regional engineering organizations, under the auspices of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organizations (UNESCO) in Paris, the World Federation of Engineering Organizations (WFEO) brings together national engineering organisations from some 100 nations and represents more than 30 million engineers from around the world. The UK representative place is held by the Institution of Civil Engineers, and Haro Bedalian is the nominated representative, with other UK representation by Jean Venables as the Chair of the Engineering and Environment Standing Committee, and me as the UK representative on the Women in Engineering Committee. The UK has another high level representative in Past ICE President Paul Jowitt who represents the Commonwealth Engineers Council, who used the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) recently to work more closely together on built environment issues. See their recent progress here.
WFEO itself is led by Dr Marlene Kanga as its President, who has a phenomenal reputation for the work she has done worldwide to promote gender diversity in engineering.
The Women in Engineering Committee has representatives from 36 countries, and already my engagement with this engagement has resulted in closer working with the South African organisation WomEng, who are promoting the goal of #1MillionGirlsinSTEM, and have an inspiring pink hard hat campaign which we are hoping to replicate in the UK with a purple version to coincide with the Women’s Engineering Society (WES) centenary in 2019. This fun campaign works on the premise that 'it takes a stereotype to break a stereotype' in promoting the hard hat image to young women. And before you role your eyes, I can tell you that this is actually working. The excitement in the room when we saw 60 young women being given pink hard hats on International Women's Day back in March was phenomenal. We ALL wanted one - hardened mature professional women engineers just as much as 16 year olds. I will tell you more about this in another post.
The next meeting of the WFEO takes place during the Global Engineering Congress at ICE in October 2018, and this is an ideal opportunity for the UK to showcase its engineering excellence to the rest of the world. Further details here. Please put this in your diaries – it looks set to be an excellent event.
Please get in touch if you would like to know more about WFEO and the Women in Engineering Committee.
Royal Academy of Engineering Visiting Professor Scheme
On 20 February the Visiting Professor Scheme nominations open for the 2018 intake, and once again the Royal Academy of Engineering are looking to appoint up to 30 new senior industry practitioners to become Visiting Professors in this well-established industry-into-academia scheme.
The purpose of this RAEng initiative is to utilise the experience of the Visiting Professors to enhance student learning as well as the employability and skills of UK engineering graduates. Under the objectives of the scheme, senior industry practitioners participate in course development, face-to-face teaching, and mentoring of engineering undergraduates at the host university for at least 12 days a year for three years.
This Award provides the university with the support necessary for the attendance of a Visiting Professor to a maximum value of £10,000 per year over three years up to a maximum of £30,000 in total.
I joined this scheme in the 2017 intake after a chance meeting with Dr Kate Sugden of Aston University at the Big Bang Fair, and whilst chatting about my current work she mentioned that it sounded like something that Aston would be interested in, and why didn’t we put in a nomination for a Visiting Professorship.
One year later, I am enjoying my first year at Aston, and am really valuing the experience that this is giving me, and hopefully fulfilling my role in bringing a different perspective to Aston in return.
My own work is on Inclusive Engineering – and this often takes some explaining. Unlike the work that I have been involved in previously through the Women’s Engineering Society and other initiatives, my work at Aston is not related to Athena Swan and the excellent diversity and inclusion initiatives that they are progressing. Instead this work is looking at the engineering itself, and how we can ensure that the products and services our future engineers produce are free from bias, accessible to all, and don’t promulgate discrimination. This I am doing by means of a compilation of relevant case studies, by working with staff and students at Aston, and through collaborations with other interested parties. (Please get in touch with me to find out more, if you are interested.)
The experience of working in an unfamiliar academic environment has been informative and enjoyable, allowing me to learn the ‘language’ of academia and being able to appreciate more closely many of the things that were previously unappreciated by me, such as the processes of accreditation, AHEP, and UKSPEC; the pressures that academics are under; the way that academic institutions functions – their goals (TEF and REF); the needs, values, worries and views of students; and many other aspects of University life and how it differs from life in industry that were not visible to me beforehand.
My role, in return, is to bring into the academic environment things that I have knowledge and visibility of from the ‘outside’ that would not necessarily be evident to those under considerable time pressures at Universities, who very often don’t have time or opportunity to be part of wider networks, and have visibility of the same influences.
And being part of the wider Royal Academy of Engineering scheme gives support and a welcome network for the Visiting Professors, who gather together once a year for a two-day conference to share experiences, learn from one another, and get updates on relevant topics.
If you are interested in applying for the 2018 intake, please take a look at the RAEng website for further details. If you are an industrialist or academic that already has a relationship that could benefit from this scheme, then get in touch with your contact and make the suggestion. If you are interested in the scheme but do not have a suitable partner in mind, then please get in touch with Stylli Charalampous ([email protected]) and the team at the Royal Academy of Engineering. They will be able to help make suitable introductions.
Nominations for the scheme open on 20 February and close on 3 April 2018. https://www.raeng.org.uk/grants-and-prizes/schemes-for-people-in-industry/visiting-professors-in-innovation
The purpose of this RAEng initiative is to utilise the experience of the Visiting Professors to enhance student learning as well as the employability and skills of UK engineering graduates. Under the objectives of the scheme, senior industry practitioners participate in course development, face-to-face teaching, and mentoring of engineering undergraduates at the host university for at least 12 days a year for three years.
This Award provides the university with the support necessary for the attendance of a Visiting Professor to a maximum value of £10,000 per year over three years up to a maximum of £30,000 in total.
I joined this scheme in the 2017 intake after a chance meeting with Dr Kate Sugden of Aston University at the Big Bang Fair, and whilst chatting about my current work she mentioned that it sounded like something that Aston would be interested in, and why didn’t we put in a nomination for a Visiting Professorship.
One year later, I am enjoying my first year at Aston, and am really valuing the experience that this is giving me, and hopefully fulfilling my role in bringing a different perspective to Aston in return.
My own work is on Inclusive Engineering – and this often takes some explaining. Unlike the work that I have been involved in previously through the Women’s Engineering Society and other initiatives, my work at Aston is not related to Athena Swan and the excellent diversity and inclusion initiatives that they are progressing. Instead this work is looking at the engineering itself, and how we can ensure that the products and services our future engineers produce are free from bias, accessible to all, and don’t promulgate discrimination. This I am doing by means of a compilation of relevant case studies, by working with staff and students at Aston, and through collaborations with other interested parties. (Please get in touch with me to find out more, if you are interested.)
The experience of working in an unfamiliar academic environment has been informative and enjoyable, allowing me to learn the ‘language’ of academia and being able to appreciate more closely many of the things that were previously unappreciated by me, such as the processes of accreditation, AHEP, and UKSPEC; the pressures that academics are under; the way that academic institutions functions – their goals (TEF and REF); the needs, values, worries and views of students; and many other aspects of University life and how it differs from life in industry that were not visible to me beforehand.
My role, in return, is to bring into the academic environment things that I have knowledge and visibility of from the ‘outside’ that would not necessarily be evident to those under considerable time pressures at Universities, who very often don’t have time or opportunity to be part of wider networks, and have visibility of the same influences.
And being part of the wider Royal Academy of Engineering scheme gives support and a welcome network for the Visiting Professors, who gather together once a year for a two-day conference to share experiences, learn from one another, and get updates on relevant topics.
If you are interested in applying for the 2018 intake, please take a look at the RAEng website for further details. If you are an industrialist or academic that already has a relationship that could benefit from this scheme, then get in touch with your contact and make the suggestion. If you are interested in the scheme but do not have a suitable partner in mind, then please get in touch with Stylli Charalampous ([email protected]) and the team at the Royal Academy of Engineering. They will be able to help make suitable introductions.
Nominations for the scheme open on 20 February and close on 3 April 2018. https://www.raeng.org.uk/grants-and-prizes/schemes-for-people-in-industry/visiting-professors-in-innovation
Be Militant, Each in Your Own Way
Today marks 100 years since some women got the vote for the first time, thanks to the brave and consistent efforts of the suffragists and the suffragettes. Whilst we are a lot further on than we were in 1918, we still have some way to go to achieve true gender equality, and equality of choice and opportunity. For example, half of state schools in the UK have no girls taking Physics A level. In my view, these girls do not have equality of choice, but their choices have been limited by the unchecked gender stereotyping that inadvertently exists within schools. And make no mistake, this inequality goes two ways with boys’ choices being equally limited. Emmeline Pankhurst called on activists to be militant “each in your own way” to achieve the result that they were striving for, so how do we continue to do that today?
On 6 March I will be speaking at the Women in Construction Summit on micro inequalities and how to spot them and call them out. This is all about finding your voice and finding your own way to recognise, and act on the numerous small and seemingly insignificant things that perpetuate inequality. Here are some examples:
· Have you ever noticed that engineers get referred to more often than not as ‘he’, and nurses as ‘she’?
· Do you hear male versions of words that have perfectly good gender neutral versions, e.g. manned, manhours, chairman, liveryman, fireman, policeman, instead of staffed, workhours, chair, member of the livery, firefighter, police officer?
· Do you hear women referred to as ‘girls’, undermining their professionalism in the workplace?
When you hear these seemingly trivial things said in conversations, it’s easy to ignore them and do nothing about it, and much more difficult to find a way to challenge them, because we generally don’t want to put ourselves into the position of ‘troublemaker’ over such small details. But there are ways to tackle these microinequalities, and I have personally pledged to act on these whenever I come across them. Here are three ways of dealing with these situations:
Direct. Direct action means you say something at the time, and (gently, politely and kindly) remind all members of the group that gender neutral language is what we are aiming for, or that a certain behaviour, word or action is not appropriate.
Deferred action. This is where you feel that it is inappropriate to mention your concern at the time it takes place, but nevertheless feel that you want to point it out, so you either have a quiet word later or drop your colleague an email, pointing our your feelings and concerns.
Indirect. This is where you ask another member of your team in a position of authority to speak up on your behalf, such as the chair of the group. This way you empower another person to become an active bystander. This may actually be the most powerful of the three – especially when this person is male - as the person you have empowered becomes much more aware of the issue you have raised, and becomes a champion for your concerns, and you are spared the risk of being seen as the complaining victim.
These are some small ways of being militant ‘in your own way’ that will hopefully produce changes that, although individually small and seemingly insignificant, add up to a much greater change in the long term.
Good luck!
On 6 March I will be speaking at the Women in Construction Summit on micro inequalities and how to spot them and call them out. This is all about finding your voice and finding your own way to recognise, and act on the numerous small and seemingly insignificant things that perpetuate inequality. Here are some examples:
· Have you ever noticed that engineers get referred to more often than not as ‘he’, and nurses as ‘she’?
· Do you hear male versions of words that have perfectly good gender neutral versions, e.g. manned, manhours, chairman, liveryman, fireman, policeman, instead of staffed, workhours, chair, member of the livery, firefighter, police officer?
· Do you hear women referred to as ‘girls’, undermining their professionalism in the workplace?
When you hear these seemingly trivial things said in conversations, it’s easy to ignore them and do nothing about it, and much more difficult to find a way to challenge them, because we generally don’t want to put ourselves into the position of ‘troublemaker’ over such small details. But there are ways to tackle these microinequalities, and I have personally pledged to act on these whenever I come across them. Here are three ways of dealing with these situations:
Direct. Direct action means you say something at the time, and (gently, politely and kindly) remind all members of the group that gender neutral language is what we are aiming for, or that a certain behaviour, word or action is not appropriate.
Deferred action. This is where you feel that it is inappropriate to mention your concern at the time it takes place, but nevertheless feel that you want to point it out, so you either have a quiet word later or drop your colleague an email, pointing our your feelings and concerns.
Indirect. This is where you ask another member of your team in a position of authority to speak up on your behalf, such as the chair of the group. This way you empower another person to become an active bystander. This may actually be the most powerful of the three – especially when this person is male - as the person you have empowered becomes much more aware of the issue you have raised, and becomes a champion for your concerns, and you are spared the risk of being seen as the complaining victim.
These are some small ways of being militant ‘in your own way’ that will hopefully produce changes that, although individually small and seemingly insignificant, add up to a much greater change in the long term.
Good luck!
International Women’s Day 2017
Be Bold for Change – My Story
In 2017 the theme for International Women’s Day is Be Bold for Change, so I thought I would share my one of my boldest decisions with you.
One of the boldest things I ever did on a personal level was deciding to put myself forward as President of the Women’s Engineering Society in 2014. The reason this was a bold step for me to take was because I have never been good at public speaking. And when I say ‘never been good at’ what I really mean is ‘ had an absolute phobia of’. So putting myself into the role of spokesperson for an organisation was something that was not without potential problems. I decided, however, that since the organisation I was representing was all about promoting diversity, then there must be room for a leader who has a different set of strengths, and that there was probably a way for me to work around what was a going to be a clear handicap. Sure enough, I managed to get through the year by sending representatives to cover the major public engagements, whilst simultaneously working on my own competence little by little, with lots of help and encouragement from a pretty extensive range of professionals and non-professionals alike (including acupuncture, hypnotherapy, cognitive behaviour therapy, breathing exercises, courses, and advice).
It wasn’t, however, until fete took a hand on 8 March 2016 – exactly a year ago – that my fear was tested to the limit, when I delivered the Founders Day lecture at Bath University in partnership with my husband, Peter Bonfield. Vice Chancellor Dame Glynis Breakwell had invited us to speak at the event almost a year before, and on receipt of the invitation I knew immediately that there was absolutely no chance of accepting. Before the reply could be sent, however, we happened to bump into Dame Glynis in the breakfast room of a hotel where there were absolutely no other guests but us! What are the chances of that happening? Dame Glynis asked whether we had received the invitation, and waited expectantly for a response, and from a height somewhere near the ceiling I watched myself nodding my head in acceptance. From that point on, the clock started to tick down towards the fateful date, and the experts brought in one after the other to try to cure my problem.
Suffice to say, I survived the day, got through the presentation with great help and encouragement from colleagues in the room, and have never looked back since. I can’t say that I am now a hugely confident speaker, and still think twice before accepting an invitation to speak at events, but I am much more confident than before, and have nothing like what can be described as a phobia now.
The boldest part of this though, was putting myself up for something that I was not quite sure I could achieve, and the pay back in terms of the impact and change that I hope has resulted from my decision to be President and then subsequently Chief Executive of the Women’s Engineering Society, and lead this work on diversity and inclusion in engineering, has been my way of creating change.
I am now a much bolder agent of change, and recommend that you stand up and be bold for the changes you want to see too – in whatever way you choose to do it.
Be Bold for Change – My Story
In 2017 the theme for International Women’s Day is Be Bold for Change, so I thought I would share my one of my boldest decisions with you.
One of the boldest things I ever did on a personal level was deciding to put myself forward as President of the Women’s Engineering Society in 2014. The reason this was a bold step for me to take was because I have never been good at public speaking. And when I say ‘never been good at’ what I really mean is ‘ had an absolute phobia of’. So putting myself into the role of spokesperson for an organisation was something that was not without potential problems. I decided, however, that since the organisation I was representing was all about promoting diversity, then there must be room for a leader who has a different set of strengths, and that there was probably a way for me to work around what was a going to be a clear handicap. Sure enough, I managed to get through the year by sending representatives to cover the major public engagements, whilst simultaneously working on my own competence little by little, with lots of help and encouragement from a pretty extensive range of professionals and non-professionals alike (including acupuncture, hypnotherapy, cognitive behaviour therapy, breathing exercises, courses, and advice).
It wasn’t, however, until fete took a hand on 8 March 2016 – exactly a year ago – that my fear was tested to the limit, when I delivered the Founders Day lecture at Bath University in partnership with my husband, Peter Bonfield. Vice Chancellor Dame Glynis Breakwell had invited us to speak at the event almost a year before, and on receipt of the invitation I knew immediately that there was absolutely no chance of accepting. Before the reply could be sent, however, we happened to bump into Dame Glynis in the breakfast room of a hotel where there were absolutely no other guests but us! What are the chances of that happening? Dame Glynis asked whether we had received the invitation, and waited expectantly for a response, and from a height somewhere near the ceiling I watched myself nodding my head in acceptance. From that point on, the clock started to tick down towards the fateful date, and the experts brought in one after the other to try to cure my problem.
Suffice to say, I survived the day, got through the presentation with great help and encouragement from colleagues in the room, and have never looked back since. I can’t say that I am now a hugely confident speaker, and still think twice before accepting an invitation to speak at events, but I am much more confident than before, and have nothing like what can be described as a phobia now.
The boldest part of this though, was putting myself up for something that I was not quite sure I could achieve, and the pay back in terms of the impact and change that I hope has resulted from my decision to be President and then subsequently Chief Executive of the Women’s Engineering Society, and lead this work on diversity and inclusion in engineering, has been my way of creating change.
I am now a much bolder agent of change, and recommend that you stand up and be bold for the changes you want to see too – in whatever way you choose to do it.
Let’s change the conversation around parental leave (Feb 2017)
Maternity leave has long been considered one of those high points of life but low points as far as a career is concerned. A recent survey by Hays on behalf of Building showed that 90% of the female respondents said that having children adversely affected their job prospects.
And we know that we lose a lot of women at this career juncture, with statistics from the Engineering Council showing that 57% of women drop off the engineering professional register at around the age of 45 compared to 17% of men.
And the reality is that we are losing a sector of the engineering community that we can ill afford to lose, just at the point when we have invested – according to some estimates – as much as £200,000 in their training and career development. And with the major skills shortages that we face in engineering in the coming years, as more and more of our trained engineers face retirement, we need to address this challenge now.
So how can we turn this around, and instead of seeing maternity and paternity breaks as a negative, see them instead as a bonus to the employer, and a chance to upskill our workforce.
The trick to doing this is to find ways of using these employees who are on an extended career break as a valuable resource that we can use to our advantage, to think of them as opportunities for our business, rather than a threat. This is how we can make them work.
Women (and men) who take family career breaks find themselves in the heart of a community that we as businesses need to find better ways of tapping in to. They are suddenly immersed in the world that we often struggle to access, and we can use this to our advantage: an employee on parental leave has access to other members of this wider community (our customers, maybe), they have access to schools (our future employees), and they have access to other experiences that contribute in a positive way to their future value as an employee. By empowering these employees to play a role in these communities we not only find benefits within our businesses, but we also provide a benefit to the employee too. Women (and sometimes men) who take extended career breaks to bring up children very quickly find themselves in a world that is a long way from their corporate former ‘self’, and can start to lose their sense of identity. They no longer see themselves as engineers (or whatever their disciple was), but as just parents, and when this happens the chances of them returning to the profession at the end of their career break diminishes. Companies who support their employees more closely throughout this phase will find that the employee is much more likely to continue to see themselves as a professional and assume that role within their new communities. Even those employees who decide not to return to their former discipline can be supported, and we can do this through the establishment of Alumni networks which keep these employees informed and engaged. And in some cases this will pay off in future years when an employee returns to the business. Schemes offered by Professional Engineering Institutions to support members on extended career breaks and reduce membership fees should also be accessed to keep these valuable skills within the sector, and available at a later date to return to work.
The roles that staff on career breaks can play in the community are numerous: they can start to break down barriers and misconceptions of the role of women in STEM; they can be valuable as a technically trained resource within the schools they are linked to through their children (and the School Gate Set programme also works to promote this positive benefit); they act as role models to the next generation of girls; and they are great ambassadors for your company out in the wider community.
Employees on career breaks can also be encouraged to progress their career whilst away from the workplace, rather than seeing their career slip backwards, by completing their application for professional registration, for example. An employee who has experienced a parental break often comes back to the workplace with a refreshed vision, better experience, more commitment, and often more perspective than they had previously. And don’t let the benefits of having part time employees escape you either. These employees can be transformational to a business, in terms of the efficiency, productivity and loyalty they bring to the workplace. Employees returning to work will also bring back with them certain needs and requirements – which, if you satisfy, will ensure that you have an inclusive workplace - which will strengthen your business in the long term. Returnship programme – like internships but for people returning from career breaks – are also great ways of getting skills back into the workforce that might otherwise be lost.
People will always have children, and have other reasons for taking extended career breaks. And if you want to accommodate parents and carers in your workplace, then you will have to find a way of ensuring that maternity/paternity/caring leave works for you, rather than against you.
Dawn Bonfield was the author of the Report RETURN: Career Break Support for PEI Members whilst at the Women’s Engineering Society, written in collaboration with the Royal Academy of Engineering. http://www.dawnbonfield.com/uploads/4/0/3/7/40379829/return_project_report_final_march_2016_final.pdf
Maternity leave has long been considered one of those high points of life but low points as far as a career is concerned. A recent survey by Hays on behalf of Building showed that 90% of the female respondents said that having children adversely affected their job prospects.
And we know that we lose a lot of women at this career juncture, with statistics from the Engineering Council showing that 57% of women drop off the engineering professional register at around the age of 45 compared to 17% of men.
And the reality is that we are losing a sector of the engineering community that we can ill afford to lose, just at the point when we have invested – according to some estimates – as much as £200,000 in their training and career development. And with the major skills shortages that we face in engineering in the coming years, as more and more of our trained engineers face retirement, we need to address this challenge now.
So how can we turn this around, and instead of seeing maternity and paternity breaks as a negative, see them instead as a bonus to the employer, and a chance to upskill our workforce.
The trick to doing this is to find ways of using these employees who are on an extended career break as a valuable resource that we can use to our advantage, to think of them as opportunities for our business, rather than a threat. This is how we can make them work.
Women (and men) who take family career breaks find themselves in the heart of a community that we as businesses need to find better ways of tapping in to. They are suddenly immersed in the world that we often struggle to access, and we can use this to our advantage: an employee on parental leave has access to other members of this wider community (our customers, maybe), they have access to schools (our future employees), and they have access to other experiences that contribute in a positive way to their future value as an employee. By empowering these employees to play a role in these communities we not only find benefits within our businesses, but we also provide a benefit to the employee too. Women (and sometimes men) who take extended career breaks to bring up children very quickly find themselves in a world that is a long way from their corporate former ‘self’, and can start to lose their sense of identity. They no longer see themselves as engineers (or whatever their disciple was), but as just parents, and when this happens the chances of them returning to the profession at the end of their career break diminishes. Companies who support their employees more closely throughout this phase will find that the employee is much more likely to continue to see themselves as a professional and assume that role within their new communities. Even those employees who decide not to return to their former discipline can be supported, and we can do this through the establishment of Alumni networks which keep these employees informed and engaged. And in some cases this will pay off in future years when an employee returns to the business. Schemes offered by Professional Engineering Institutions to support members on extended career breaks and reduce membership fees should also be accessed to keep these valuable skills within the sector, and available at a later date to return to work.
The roles that staff on career breaks can play in the community are numerous: they can start to break down barriers and misconceptions of the role of women in STEM; they can be valuable as a technically trained resource within the schools they are linked to through their children (and the School Gate Set programme also works to promote this positive benefit); they act as role models to the next generation of girls; and they are great ambassadors for your company out in the wider community.
Employees on career breaks can also be encouraged to progress their career whilst away from the workplace, rather than seeing their career slip backwards, by completing their application for professional registration, for example. An employee who has experienced a parental break often comes back to the workplace with a refreshed vision, better experience, more commitment, and often more perspective than they had previously. And don’t let the benefits of having part time employees escape you either. These employees can be transformational to a business, in terms of the efficiency, productivity and loyalty they bring to the workplace. Employees returning to work will also bring back with them certain needs and requirements – which, if you satisfy, will ensure that you have an inclusive workplace - which will strengthen your business in the long term. Returnship programme – like internships but for people returning from career breaks – are also great ways of getting skills back into the workforce that might otherwise be lost.
People will always have children, and have other reasons for taking extended career breaks. And if you want to accommodate parents and carers in your workplace, then you will have to find a way of ensuring that maternity/paternity/caring leave works for you, rather than against you.
Dawn Bonfield was the author of the Report RETURN: Career Break Support for PEI Members whilst at the Women’s Engineering Society, written in collaboration with the Royal Academy of Engineering. http://www.dawnbonfield.com/uploads/4/0/3/7/40379829/return_project_report_final_march_2016_final.pdf
Inclusive Engineering (July 2016)
I have written previously about the need for diversity in engineering, and gave the arguments that should persuade us all that increased diversity in engineering is a business imperative, and that it’s time to act. This time I want to concentrate on ways to achieve diversity, and the key word here is INCLUSION. Diversity as a concept that is often seen as threatening by male senior managers because it specifically challenges what are often described – unfairly in my opinion – as the pale, male and stale senior members of the C-suite. If we are looking for diversity then surely that means that we need to replace those who are not ‘diverse’ with those who are ‘diverse’? This is where we sometimes go wrong. Diversity is not just about hiring more women and other under-represented groups when we bring in our new recruits, because if this is done in isolation then this is a recipe for disaster – a lot of money will have been wasted on recruiting people who will feel unvalued, unsupported and unwelcome and the exercise will leave everybody with the view that it was a bad idea in the first place. Before diversity can be achieved we need to ensure that our workplaces are inclusive. Just like health and safety, or ethics, inclusivity is one of the core engineering competences that not only ensures that we work in an environment that suits all workers and all groups of people, but it ensures that the engineering solutions that we develop are suitable for the global diverse population. An inclusive environment is one in which all employers feel free to be themselves in the workplace and that they are encouraged to bring their specific viewpoints to the team. It is one where team members are encouraged to know and build upon their strengths and where managers work hard to ensure that they consider the implications of workplace processes and practices on their team members. Inclusive engineering is a concept which ensures that before a product or a process is developed that it is equally accessible to all users, and that all viewpoints have been considered before proceeding. Inclusivity is something that everybody can learn and develop, and is something that just like health and safety needs to be taught and needs to be practiced and challenged. It is a competence that can be measured and should be included in training. For anybody who uses Lean processes, they will know that small changes make a big difference. Those lucky enough to work in diverse teams will realise the big differences that can occur by just having one female member join a previously all male team – these differences are measurable and real, but in order to ensure that one female member in an all male team feels welcome, the culture has to be inclusive otherwise the benefits will not be sustained, and we will continue in the Catch-22 position of needing more women in engineering but not being able to attract or retain them.
The Women’s Engineering Society (WES) is approaching its centenary in 2019 and has started to work with other organisations who champion under-represented groups such as InterEngineering, the LGBT network, to ensure that inclusivity in engineering is the route the ensuring increased diversity, and finding ways to educate the engineering industry on ways to become more inclusive. We are currently developing a university module with the universities of Loughborough, Warwick and York to ensure that Inclusive Engineering is taught at undergraduate level.
And let’s find an alternative to the pale, male and stale phrase that we hear too often and turn it into Dudes who Include, or Guys as Allies (both phrases courtesy of my 19 year old son) – please let me know if you can come up with a better one.
I have written previously about the need for diversity in engineering, and gave the arguments that should persuade us all that increased diversity in engineering is a business imperative, and that it’s time to act. This time I want to concentrate on ways to achieve diversity, and the key word here is INCLUSION. Diversity as a concept that is often seen as threatening by male senior managers because it specifically challenges what are often described – unfairly in my opinion – as the pale, male and stale senior members of the C-suite. If we are looking for diversity then surely that means that we need to replace those who are not ‘diverse’ with those who are ‘diverse’? This is where we sometimes go wrong. Diversity is not just about hiring more women and other under-represented groups when we bring in our new recruits, because if this is done in isolation then this is a recipe for disaster – a lot of money will have been wasted on recruiting people who will feel unvalued, unsupported and unwelcome and the exercise will leave everybody with the view that it was a bad idea in the first place. Before diversity can be achieved we need to ensure that our workplaces are inclusive. Just like health and safety, or ethics, inclusivity is one of the core engineering competences that not only ensures that we work in an environment that suits all workers and all groups of people, but it ensures that the engineering solutions that we develop are suitable for the global diverse population. An inclusive environment is one in which all employers feel free to be themselves in the workplace and that they are encouraged to bring their specific viewpoints to the team. It is one where team members are encouraged to know and build upon their strengths and where managers work hard to ensure that they consider the implications of workplace processes and practices on their team members. Inclusive engineering is a concept which ensures that before a product or a process is developed that it is equally accessible to all users, and that all viewpoints have been considered before proceeding. Inclusivity is something that everybody can learn and develop, and is something that just like health and safety needs to be taught and needs to be practiced and challenged. It is a competence that can be measured and should be included in training. For anybody who uses Lean processes, they will know that small changes make a big difference. Those lucky enough to work in diverse teams will realise the big differences that can occur by just having one female member join a previously all male team – these differences are measurable and real, but in order to ensure that one female member in an all male team feels welcome, the culture has to be inclusive otherwise the benefits will not be sustained, and we will continue in the Catch-22 position of needing more women in engineering but not being able to attract or retain them.
The Women’s Engineering Society (WES) is approaching its centenary in 2019 and has started to work with other organisations who champion under-represented groups such as InterEngineering, the LGBT network, to ensure that inclusivity in engineering is the route the ensuring increased diversity, and finding ways to educate the engineering industry on ways to become more inclusive. We are currently developing a university module with the universities of Loughborough, Warwick and York to ensure that Inclusive Engineering is taught at undergraduate level.
And let’s find an alternative to the pale, male and stale phrase that we hear too often and turn it into Dudes who Include, or Guys as Allies (both phrases courtesy of my 19 year old son) – please let me know if you can come up with a better one.
|
Disruptive Diversity (January 2016)
In June 2015 David Balmforth, President of the Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE), commissioned me to write a report on how ICE can improve gender diversity both internally and within the industry as a whole. This report is called 'Disruptive Diversity' and is due for publication towards the end of 2015. Below is the draft Executive Summary. Read the full report here. |
|
| Disruptive Diversity.pdf |
Disruptive Diversity Executive Summary (Draft)
Diversity in engineering is not improving fast enough. After years of effort, the engineering and construction sectors are still struggling to get the proportion of women engineers above one in ten, with other under-represented groups equally poorly represented. Indeed the number of female construction workers on site is only one in a hundred.
Time has come for a concerted and co-ordinated effort to address this. Individual pockets of excellence exist within the industry and much money has been spent on outreach activity to persuade the next generation of boys and girls that engineering is for them. But what has been lacking is the culture shift and the co-ordination that brings the need, and indeed the desire for diversity into core business.
Diversity and inclusion principles need to be pervasive - part of every decision that is made, and constantly referenced. The philosophy of the removal of barriers to diversity, in the hope that this is enough to actually create diversity, is not sufficient. The door needs to be unlocked, of course, but it has also got to be opened, and diversity invited in. This is not favouritism to women and under-represented groups - this is business. Lack of diversity is costing the industry money in terms of lack of skills, productivity, staff safety and morale, innovation, profit and creativity. The industry is changing. The world is changing. Disruptive technology, big data, the lifestyle, values and aspirations of young people all point to a future which is different from the past. Engineering needs this diversity and this creativity to thrive and the UK to remain competitive in the international marketplace, and we need to act now to attract this future workforce.
If that alone wasn't enough to stimulate action, other arguments should. We have a skills shortage in engineering which is predicted to get worse over the next ten years. We will not be able to fill these jobs if we recruit from only half of the population.
And finally, and crucially, women and certain groups of society (including lesbian, gay, black, transgender, ethnic minority, and certain classes of society) are being denied equality of choice. Girls do not see engineering as being suitable for them, and other under-represented groups do not see engineering as being inclusive enough for them. These inequalities are often compounded in people who have the characteristics belonging to more than one under-represented group (intersectionality), and these people are doubly disadvantaged. These groups often do not feel comfortable in the sector, they are not respected sufficiently, and do not progress equally. They are being disadvantaged in their career and life choices because the industry is inadequate at attracting them, reluctant to promote them, and not sufficiently caring to support them back to work after career breaks. This is not good enough. Something needs to be done to address these inequalities, and to ensure that we work in an industry which can hold its head up and claim that it is truly welcoming and inclusive of a diverse workforce.
Although these inequalities are not deliberate or malicious, as an industry we are guilty of complacency in not addressing them adequately; in not caring sufficiently to do something fundamental about it; in assuming that it is a problem which needs solving by women, a diversity committee or an outreach activity. In fact it is an issue that every one of us needs to address in every decision that we take and every project that we work on. Just as we need to be sure that we are following the principles of health and safety in everything we do, we need to follow the principles of respect, diversity and inclusion.
This report, commissioned by ICE President David Balmforth, looks at practical ways that this culture shift can be achieved both within the Institution of Civil Engineers, and more broadly in the industry as a whole. Action is recommended on many levels to change practices and behaviours so that diversity and inclusion becomes embedded in the Institution and its membership. This is not an evidence based report nor an overview of the industry. The case has been made and the evidence has been recorded extensively elsewhere. This report represents the views of the author and is intended as a thought piece to stimulate further action. The report is limited to practices and solutions relevant to the UK. It concentrates predominantly on measures that can be taken to address the lack of women in the sector, but many measures recommended will be equally relevant to diversity and inequality in general and will benefit other under-represented groups.
The recommendations and suggestions given in the report are an indication of what can be done to build upon and increase the good work that is already underway at the Institution of Civil Engineers both internally and in collaboration with the Royal Academy of Engineering Diversity Concordat. As a leader in the construction sector and a membership organisation, the adoption and endorsement of these best practices has the potential for much wider reaching change within the industry as a whole. Not all recommendations will be feasible and change will not be immediate. What is important is that a plan is developed and owned by the ICE, and its success will rest on this ownership, accountability and desire to change at every level.
The recommended actions for the Institution, which are also appropriate for the whole industry, fall into the categories below:
Finally some additional ideas are given which could lead to step changes in the industry. Recommendations are given which are actionable by the corporate sector, the education sector, and the government or other sectors. A selection of these recommendations includes:
Diversity in engineering is not improving fast enough. After years of effort, the engineering and construction sectors are still struggling to get the proportion of women engineers above one in ten, with other under-represented groups equally poorly represented. Indeed the number of female construction workers on site is only one in a hundred.
Time has come for a concerted and co-ordinated effort to address this. Individual pockets of excellence exist within the industry and much money has been spent on outreach activity to persuade the next generation of boys and girls that engineering is for them. But what has been lacking is the culture shift and the co-ordination that brings the need, and indeed the desire for diversity into core business.
Diversity and inclusion principles need to be pervasive - part of every decision that is made, and constantly referenced. The philosophy of the removal of barriers to diversity, in the hope that this is enough to actually create diversity, is not sufficient. The door needs to be unlocked, of course, but it has also got to be opened, and diversity invited in. This is not favouritism to women and under-represented groups - this is business. Lack of diversity is costing the industry money in terms of lack of skills, productivity, staff safety and morale, innovation, profit and creativity. The industry is changing. The world is changing. Disruptive technology, big data, the lifestyle, values and aspirations of young people all point to a future which is different from the past. Engineering needs this diversity and this creativity to thrive and the UK to remain competitive in the international marketplace, and we need to act now to attract this future workforce.
If that alone wasn't enough to stimulate action, other arguments should. We have a skills shortage in engineering which is predicted to get worse over the next ten years. We will not be able to fill these jobs if we recruit from only half of the population.
And finally, and crucially, women and certain groups of society (including lesbian, gay, black, transgender, ethnic minority, and certain classes of society) are being denied equality of choice. Girls do not see engineering as being suitable for them, and other under-represented groups do not see engineering as being inclusive enough for them. These inequalities are often compounded in people who have the characteristics belonging to more than one under-represented group (intersectionality), and these people are doubly disadvantaged. These groups often do not feel comfortable in the sector, they are not respected sufficiently, and do not progress equally. They are being disadvantaged in their career and life choices because the industry is inadequate at attracting them, reluctant to promote them, and not sufficiently caring to support them back to work after career breaks. This is not good enough. Something needs to be done to address these inequalities, and to ensure that we work in an industry which can hold its head up and claim that it is truly welcoming and inclusive of a diverse workforce.
Although these inequalities are not deliberate or malicious, as an industry we are guilty of complacency in not addressing them adequately; in not caring sufficiently to do something fundamental about it; in assuming that it is a problem which needs solving by women, a diversity committee or an outreach activity. In fact it is an issue that every one of us needs to address in every decision that we take and every project that we work on. Just as we need to be sure that we are following the principles of health and safety in everything we do, we need to follow the principles of respect, diversity and inclusion.
This report, commissioned by ICE President David Balmforth, looks at practical ways that this culture shift can be achieved both within the Institution of Civil Engineers, and more broadly in the industry as a whole. Action is recommended on many levels to change practices and behaviours so that diversity and inclusion becomes embedded in the Institution and its membership. This is not an evidence based report nor an overview of the industry. The case has been made and the evidence has been recorded extensively elsewhere. This report represents the views of the author and is intended as a thought piece to stimulate further action. The report is limited to practices and solutions relevant to the UK. It concentrates predominantly on measures that can be taken to address the lack of women in the sector, but many measures recommended will be equally relevant to diversity and inequality in general and will benefit other under-represented groups.
The recommendations and suggestions given in the report are an indication of what can be done to build upon and increase the good work that is already underway at the Institution of Civil Engineers both internally and in collaboration with the Royal Academy of Engineering Diversity Concordat. As a leader in the construction sector and a membership organisation, the adoption and endorsement of these best practices has the potential for much wider reaching change within the industry as a whole. Not all recommendations will be feasible and change will not be immediate. What is important is that a plan is developed and owned by the ICE, and its success will rest on this ownership, accountability and desire to change at every level.
The recommended actions for the Institution, which are also appropriate for the whole industry, fall into the categories below:
- Measuring - regular benchmarking, tracking and reporting against diversity criteria for both staff and members. Analysing trends and taking mitigating action.
- Changing - changing the culture of the Institution to reflect the importance of diversity as an over-riding principle of best practice. This will impact on accreditation, professional review, reporting, communication, campaigns and project work. Change will also come by learning from best practices shared by other Professional Institutions through the Royal Academy of Engineering Diversity Concordat, for example. Challenging poor practice, and zero tolerance for bias.
- Educating - training to educate staff, committee and council members, volunteers and other partners at all levels to ensure and instil best practice and develop diverse teams
- Inspiring - use of targeted outreach, careers guidance and role models to inspire the next generation of diverse talent, and finding a way to reach parents and teachers as well as students
- Supporting - ensuring that under-represented groups are supported and developed through the establishment of special interest groups, but not relying on these groups to be the owners of change
- Influencing - using external influence and collaborative partnerships to campaign for bigger changes and make progress more widespread by sharing knowledge, best practice, and resources.
Finally some additional ideas are given which could lead to step changes in the industry. Recommendations are given which are actionable by the corporate sector, the education sector, and the government or other sectors. A selection of these recommendations includes:
- Changes in legislation to drive behavioural change, including the mandatory reporting of gender pay and gender diversity ratios in each occupational level; the use of government procurement contracts to embed diversity and inclusion best practice; a tighter framework to the Equal Opportunities Employer Mark with guidelines for Diversity and Inclusion; financial incentivisation of Higher Education courses that are of direct benefit to the economic future of the UK linked to the register of strategic skills shortages; requirement of the Athena Swan Bronze award for all Institutions receiving research funding from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC).
- Promotion of industrial best practice including 50/50 male to female targets for job shortlists; sign up to the Industry Ten Steps or the Think, Act Report frameworks; senior and board level diversity targets in line with the Davis Report; flexible and part time working as the norm for all employees; benchmarking the business cost of the lack of diversity; the establishment of support networks as best practice for under-represented staff; the establishment of widespread Returnship programmes to bring women back into engineering.
- Improved careers support for schools including a dedicated careers service for the 14-18 year age range, and their parents, offering specific advice for careers in the engineering sector; more work experience opportunities in engineering offered for students; establishment of more non-linear routes into the engineering sector to include conversion courses, joint courses and more collaboration with the creative industry.
- A visible and long term commitment to a co-ordinated and collaborative plan of action by professional bodies, industry, education and the media, and a dedicated media centre for engineering.
Sir Tim Hunt's Comments - What can we learn? 14 June 2015
The row over the sexist comments made by Sir Tim Hunt on women in science rambles on this weekend, and we are - in general - united in our condemnation of his remarks and their unwanted consequences. But these views are not new, and any woman working in science or engineering will doubtless have stories to tell about how she has encountered negative gender bias. The thing we need to do now though is work out how we move on from here in a positive way. The sentiments that Tim Hunt expressed were real, and he believes them. He does see a problem. But the problem is in his perception. Diversity is a benefit, not a problem. We need to ensure that we change the culture of our organisations to recognise diversity as a positive goal and not something to be avoided or criticised. This is a state of mind, and changing it is something that is quite achievable, with training and appropriate challenge.
Let's look at what he said in more detail. Scientists who meet in labs fall in love with one another. So what's wrong with that? It happens in all walks of life - not just science labs. And don't we want to create children with scientifically literate parents? This is certainly what happened to me when I was in the university lab, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
And on the subject of crying - well what's wrong with crying? We don't all have to be stiff upper lipped. Crying is fine. Emotion is good. Diversity is key. If women cry then men need to work out how to deal with that - it's not women who always need to change.
Tim Hunt will surely wish he had never opened his mouth about women in science but now that he has, let's use his comments for positive change. Let's work out how to rebrand diversity as a good thing to be encouraged - in everybody's opinion. And Tim, if you want to make amends and show your support for young women in science, then we offer you a role on our team working on the Sparxx project for girls in STEM. And could I suggest that as a science community we show a bit of our sensitive side and offer Tim some kindness now - we can all say things we regret from time to time.
Let's see what positives we can take from this, and thank Tim for the opportunity to work this one out.
Note to Professional Engineer Magazine, June 2015
I was prompted to write this blog after sending in a note about the lack of diversity in the journal 'Professional Engineer' this month. The response to my complaint was that diversity has featured numerous times in the magazine in the past, and we have even had whole issues dedicated to it. But this isn't what I'm talking about. I don't want another article on diversity - far from it. I am reluctant to write any more about diversity in engineering and why we need it. The case has been proven and the battle won and most people now agree that this is no longer a nice to have but an imperative.
But what we need to do now is not keep talking and writing about it, but actually doing it. It's time to stop talking the talk and start walking the walk. So what that means is get your gender lenses out and start looking at your company, your processes, your job applications, your assessment centres, your company magazines, and your style of management through the lenses of diversity. So in the case of this issue of the journal, do you have enough images of underrepresented groups? Do you have sufficient articles or quotes from female contributors? Is your journal full of same old, same olds, and I mean that in terms of the technologies you are featuring as well as the faces you are showing. Journals which feature images of engineering in the same traditional ways over and over again with umpteen pictures of trains, planes and engines without any images to represent the newer disruptive technologies such as robotics, artificial intelligence, smart technologies, humanitarian or medical engineering are continually reinforcing an industry which is monocultural.
Diversity needs to be evident in every aspect of your business and your communications, and if that will mean that you need to be disruptive to introduce it, then be disruptive.
Thanks for reading this blog, and if you have any comments or suggestions then please let me know.
The row over the sexist comments made by Sir Tim Hunt on women in science rambles on this weekend, and we are - in general - united in our condemnation of his remarks and their unwanted consequences. But these views are not new, and any woman working in science or engineering will doubtless have stories to tell about how she has encountered negative gender bias. The thing we need to do now though is work out how we move on from here in a positive way. The sentiments that Tim Hunt expressed were real, and he believes them. He does see a problem. But the problem is in his perception. Diversity is a benefit, not a problem. We need to ensure that we change the culture of our organisations to recognise diversity as a positive goal and not something to be avoided or criticised. This is a state of mind, and changing it is something that is quite achievable, with training and appropriate challenge.
Let's look at what he said in more detail. Scientists who meet in labs fall in love with one another. So what's wrong with that? It happens in all walks of life - not just science labs. And don't we want to create children with scientifically literate parents? This is certainly what happened to me when I was in the university lab, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
And on the subject of crying - well what's wrong with crying? We don't all have to be stiff upper lipped. Crying is fine. Emotion is good. Diversity is key. If women cry then men need to work out how to deal with that - it's not women who always need to change.
Tim Hunt will surely wish he had never opened his mouth about women in science but now that he has, let's use his comments for positive change. Let's work out how to rebrand diversity as a good thing to be encouraged - in everybody's opinion. And Tim, if you want to make amends and show your support for young women in science, then we offer you a role on our team working on the Sparxx project for girls in STEM. And could I suggest that as a science community we show a bit of our sensitive side and offer Tim some kindness now - we can all say things we regret from time to time.
Let's see what positives we can take from this, and thank Tim for the opportunity to work this one out.
Note to Professional Engineer Magazine, June 2015
I was prompted to write this blog after sending in a note about the lack of diversity in the journal 'Professional Engineer' this month. The response to my complaint was that diversity has featured numerous times in the magazine in the past, and we have even had whole issues dedicated to it. But this isn't what I'm talking about. I don't want another article on diversity - far from it. I am reluctant to write any more about diversity in engineering and why we need it. The case has been proven and the battle won and most people now agree that this is no longer a nice to have but an imperative.
But what we need to do now is not keep talking and writing about it, but actually doing it. It's time to stop talking the talk and start walking the walk. So what that means is get your gender lenses out and start looking at your company, your processes, your job applications, your assessment centres, your company magazines, and your style of management through the lenses of diversity. So in the case of this issue of the journal, do you have enough images of underrepresented groups? Do you have sufficient articles or quotes from female contributors? Is your journal full of same old, same olds, and I mean that in terms of the technologies you are featuring as well as the faces you are showing. Journals which feature images of engineering in the same traditional ways over and over again with umpteen pictures of trains, planes and engines without any images to represent the newer disruptive technologies such as robotics, artificial intelligence, smart technologies, humanitarian or medical engineering are continually reinforcing an industry which is monocultural.
Diversity needs to be evident in every aspect of your business and your communications, and if that will mean that you need to be disruptive to introduce it, then be disruptive.
Thanks for reading this blog, and if you have any comments or suggestions then please let me know.